Pages

Monday, April 28, 2014

I picked up my Glock 42 this morning and it just so happened that the gun shop had extra magazines! I can now follow Mez's 3/5 rule.

I'm very excited to have a Glock that actually fits my hand and can't wait to get it out on the range. Since I have enough magazines, I'll shoot it for the May defensive pistol match - I can't think of a better way to break it in.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5 - FIVE - magazines! And a gun :)

The Glock will get a paint job. I'm thinking a red slide with black overspray. Similar to the Para, but slightly in-your-face. Or ... I can make the Glock match Newt and go Alien II (green). I don't know yet, but I've got some time to think about it.

Saturday, April 26, 2014

I am often amazed that many
shooters only have the one or two magazines that came with their guns.Not realizing that they will not have time to
reload outside of practice at the firing range.Spare magazines are what you need to carry spare ammunition at the
ready.This applies to self-defense,
competition or the zombie apocalypse.

The big question is how many
spare magazines do you need.The generic
answer is enough spares to cover loss and/or damage with enough rounds to cover
your needs.This doesn’t tell you
much.

I want to introduce what I
call the 3/5 Rule for magazines.You
need a minimum of 3 magazines, and 5 magazines is highly recommended.

Three magazines will allow
you to have one in your gun, and two spares.This is enough to allow for lost or broken magazines and enough
ammunition capacity to handle most situations.

The only situation you may
have problems with is competition.Three
magazines may not have enough capacity for some competitions, especially if you
have single stack magazines with a capacity less then 10 rounds.

I personally recommend five
magazines.This will definitely give you
enough spares to cover loss or damage and enough capacity for any need.Even a zombie apocalypse.I also see 5 magazines being a lifetime
supply for the average shooter.

This same rule can also be
applied to rifles as well, especially with military pattern rifles such as the
AR-15.The purpose of these rifles is
defeated without spare magazines.A good
lever gun is more useful if you don’t have spare magazines.

I would even buy a few more
for rifles.Three to five magazines
minimum of 20-30 round capacity for self defense, competition and a zombie
apocalypse, 2 to 4 ten round magazines for range work and 1 or 2 five round
magazines if you hunt with your semi-auto rifle.This gives you six to eleven magazines for
your rifle.

Spare magazines may be
expensive, but a needed accessory for your firearm to work properly.They should be considered a semi-disposable
item.Do take care of them.They will give you years of good
service.But be aware they wear out,
break or can be lost.Definitely buy
spares.One or two is not enough.

Three to Five magazines
should be enough for the average shooter.

One last comment, a quality
magazine carrier is worth the money.It
is easier to carry your spare magazines and will keep dirt and pocket lint out
them, which may cause malfunctions.

Many manufacturers are now
including a cheap plastic magazine carrier.They are cheap in both contexts of the term.Buy something better as soon as you can.

Hope this information is
useful to you and clears up any questions on how many magazines you need.

Tuesday, April 8, 2014

Todays post will be something usually not found
in most firearm reviews.I will be
talking about quality defects.Most
reviews read the same, X firearm is the greatest thing since sliced bread and
will outshoot anything produced.Boring
and tells me nothing.

As firearms are mechanical devices you will
once in a while have a defect.Some are
minor and easily fixed.Others are major
and warrant a return to the factory.No
manufacturer can have zero defects.That
is impossible.But all manufacturers
should strive to minimize defects.Rework costs money and therefore profit.There is also the hazard of perception.You many have the greatest product every produced.But if buyers perceive your product to be of
low quality and do not buy it, you are done and your business will fail.

I understand manufacturers are trying to reduce
costs as the economy flushes down the crapper.Thanks Federal Government for the wonderful mismanagement of the
economy.But there is a point cost
cutting must stop in order to maintain quality.If quality drops too far, people stop buying your products.

And this drop is quality is what I am seeing
across the firearms industry.The next
section will outline the defects I have seen.

IWI:

The maker of the must have rifle of 2013, the
TAVOR.Yes, this $2000 rifle had issues
right of the box.It would
shortstroke.Shortstroking is when rifle
does not have enough gas pressure to push the slide all the way rearward to
pick up the next cartridge from the magazine.So you end up pulling the charging handle each time you want to fire the
rifle.Very frustrating.

After 500 rounds the problem seems to have self
corrected itself.It cycles fine now
with no problems.I’m not sure what was
the problem.It could be as simple as it
needed a break-in period.But 500 rounds
is an expensive break-in.That is 500
rounds that I did not get to train with and practice my skills.And luckily I did not need to bet my life on
this rifle.

I will not trust this rifle until I have
another 500-1000 rounds through it, trouble free.This is a serious defect of perception.Luckily I can afford to own more than one
rifle.

Taurus:

I recently purchased a model 650.This is a subnose .357 revolver.Taurus’s version of the Smith and Wesson
model 640.Everything looked fine when I
purchased it.But went south the first
time I fired it.It turns out the barrel
isn’t installed correctly.The barrel is
not fully seated and is crooked.Since
this is a fixed sight revolver, this means the front sight is canted to the
left.It shoots 2 inches right at 7
yards and 5 inches right at 15 yards.Again, I’m fortunate to have the means to have more than one
handgun.And I have enough experience to
compensate for this sight misalignment if I had to.

What if this is someones first and only
handgun?What if they need it immediately
as there was a potential threat?Do they
have the time to return it for warranty work?Can they live without their firearm for several weeks while it is
repaired?Do they have enough skill and
experience to compensate for the canted front sight?I see this as a potential life threatening
quality defect.This handgun should not
have left the factory.Especially with
an obvious and blatant defect.

Ruger:

I recently picked up a Ruger 10/22.A fun little .22 rifle.But when I stripped it to clean it, the
recoil spring came off the op rod.The
spring should be a captive spring.The
spring should not fly off.The factory
did not put enough crimp on it.A minor
defect and easily fixed by those of us who are mechanically inclined.Not everyone is mechanically inclined.Now they have a useless rifle that requires
repair.

Next up in the Ruger line is a model
SP101.A .357 snubby revolver.I found 2 items on this one firearm.First, there was a large burr on the frame
that was not removed during the assembly process.It did not affect function, but should have
been removed by the factory.A few quick
strokes of a file and the problem disappeared.Again, not everyone can do this.

Next, when I pulled it apart to replace the
mainspring (poor mans trigger job), I noticed the machining of the internal
frame and trigger assembly was rougher than on older Rugers I own.This explains why the trigger pull was a bit
crunchy.

Again, functionality was not affected.But, my perception of Ruger has gone down a
bit.

I have another SP101, an older model.And when compared side by side, the older
model has a nicer fit and finish.

Definitely, quality is going down, but has not
yet affected functionality.

Volquartsen:

Yes, the all mighty Volquartsen.Maker of high quality parts for your Ruger
10/22 and MK3 and MK22/45 handguns has sent me some real lemons.And serious ones that require the parts to be
sent back to the factory for replacement.

·The mounting holes were not
machined correctly.When mounted into
the receiver, the

fit was too tight and caused the bolt to drag.

The second assembly had the following problem:

·The mounting holes are
machined incorrectly and the assembly cannot be installed.

You can even see the poor machining in the
rear mounting hole.

These defects come from a company that has a
reputation for quality and precision.Not only are these functional defects, but my perception of Volquartsen
has dropped considerably.Has
Volquartsen gone the route of Kimber?Lowered the quality level to accommodate mass manufacture and then rely
on quality of their name to keep business coming in?I hope not.Especially when this trigger assembly costs more than the rifle it will
be installed on.

As a Manufacturing Engineer, if I saw this, I
would start pulling samples to see if I have a systemic problem.It is very rare to get 2 assemblies, in a
row, that have such serious problems unless there is a deeper systemic
issue.

Conclusion:

Am I saying not to buy from these manufacturers
ever again?No!Any manufacturer can produce defects.It happens. I would by these products again.Do carefully examine your firearm before you
purchase.And make sure they work
correctly before you bet anything on them, especially your life.

What I am seeing is an industry wide drop in
overall quality.Everyone is cutting
costs and it is showing in the end product.What you are buying today is not as nice as a few years ago.

In my opinion it is almost impossible to get
this many defects across multiple products and manufacturers.Except for the TAVOR, all items listed above
have been purchased within the last six weeks from multiple gun shops and
online retailers.

Final comments on quality:

Why quality matters?Because in todays world, everyone and their
brother makes and AR-15, or a 1911 or a precision bolt action rifle.So whom do you buy from?One factor is who provides the features you
want.But more importantly, who produces
what you want, with the best quality for the best price. I think quality is the more important of the
two.This also extends to customer
service as well.I will pay more for the
same product if I get superior customer service.

And on the flip side, you may have the greatest
product ever, but if your customer service sucks, I will not buy from you
unless I absolutely need what you are selling and there is no one else.

Friday, April 4, 2014

Back in June of 2012, I wrote a glowing review of a new gun shop. I loved the place - it became my go-to shop for a few months and then things began to change. By the time their first year was out, the co-owner, who had become somewhat of a friend had some health issues and was pushed out. I didn't like the way the shop was going, it was now staffed by a bunch of young wanna-bes who didn't know jack-shit about guns. My fun shop had turned into a large box store. However, because I didn't want to hurt my friend, I didn't print a retraction despite desperately wanting to.

The last time I was in the shop, I might have well have gone to Sportsman's Warehouse. I was ignored and talked down to. The young bucks didn't have time for a middle-aged woman (who has more shooting experience than the whole lot of them put together). The positive influence of the co-owner was gone - the store was all about volume and they didn't care how they moved that volume. But, yet, I held off.

Today, though, the taste of betrayal is strong. And I don't like it.

As most of you know, Colorado is currently locked in a legal battle regarding the gun laws passed last year. Fifty-five of our sheriffs have filed a lawsuit against the state, and several gun shops have joined. Here's a link to the original complaint. Note that USA Liberty Arms is clearly listed as one of the plaintiffs on page two, right under MagPul Industries.

Today John Berrud, of Jensen Arms, and I testified on behalf of the
Plaintiff FFL's in our lawsuit against the State of Colorado. Governor
John Hickenlooper signed three anti-second Amendment,
anti-gun rights, anti-personal freedom bills into law. This lawsuit
which seeks to overturn these as unconstitutional, is based on the
Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

While there were originally 9 FFL holders (gun stores) in this suit, to
represent the group as a whole. Only 5 took the effort to compile the
necessary data, and submit the necessary paperwork to the attorneys in
order to proceed with the suit.

One of the original 9
plaintiffs in the suit, USA Liberty Arms, not only failed to support the
lawsuit by refusing to provide data, they were listed on the State
Attorney's list of potential witnesses.

In a news article
printed in January co-owner David McClelland was quoted as saying they
have "managed to adjust to the changes." "They've also found special magazines that comply with the law."
"They make California-compliant models that take 10-round magazines
easily," McClelland said. "Abiding by that law is very easy."

Meanwhile the testimonies of the all the Plaintiff's has gone well, the
attorneys are getting in the arguments they have against these laws.
Tomorrow starts the testimonies of the defendant. The trial is expected
to end late next week. Keep the attorneys in your thoughts and prayers
as they proceed.

We are hoping Justice will prevail, and these anti-gun, anti-liberty laws will be declared unconstitutional and thrown out.

I've tried looking for the Defense's current witness list, but can't seem to find it (I do not have strong Google-Fu apparently). I will, until proven otherwise, believe the post by RMSS because they are currently testifying in the lawsuit and have access to all of the court records.

Not so much as one red cent of mine will be spent at USA Liberty Arms. Not because they're a witness for the Defense, not really. The reason is that they joined one side of the lawsuit and switched sides.

I have respect for businesses (and people) who stand for what they believe in, even if their beliefs are different from mine.

I have ZERO respect for businesses (and people) who can't make up their minds.

I just wonder if their switching sides has anything to do with them being approved to build a huge indoor shooting range that previously met a lot of opposition? Suddenly, their proposal went from "no way will we approve this", to "sure, it'll be good for the area". Feels to me like there's been a bit of behind-the-scenes horse trading. (Or I've been spending too much time with my Conspiracy Nutter friends.)